This isn't a crime situation. It's a war. A major goal of the international law of war is to mitigate harm to civilians. When one warring party doesn't go along with that plan, the other party is not required to give up on defending itself.
"Ooh, you shot rockets at a city from a school. I guess I can't do anything about that! I've gotta just let you keep on doing that. Wow, putting military stuff in schools is some kind of super power you have, that just prevents me from ever fighting back! Neat! Maybe I should do that too ... oh wait, it wouldn't work, you attack schools all the time, even without military targets in them."
There's a really good reason that nations should comply with international law and not do shit like deliberately put military targets in civilian buildings.
There's a really good reason that nations in armed conflict should comply with international law and not conceal military targets as medical facilities.
Why? Because doing those things makes the civilian buildings and medical facilities into legitimate military targets.
A major goal of the international law of war is to reduce civilian suffering. The rules that Hamas is breaking, are rules that exist to reduce civilian suffering -- in this case, the suffering of Palestinian civilians.
But yeah, if your foe is shooting at you from an ambulance, yes you get to take out the ambulance. If your foe is shooting rockets from a school, yes you get to take out the school. Ambulances and schools aren't supposed to be shooting at all.
But again, Hamas doesn't recognize a civilian/military distinction. This makes them a really shitty government.
Hamas puts their rocket launchers next to schools, so the only way to take out their ability to launch rockets at Israeli civilians also has a high likelihood of damaging the school. Hamas puts terrorist HQs in tunnels under hospitals, weapons caches in apartment buildings, and so on. This is deliberate; the point is to increase Palestinian suffering in order to ensure that Palestinians and Israelis cannot make peace, with the ultimate aim of establishing a new Islamic State in Palestine.
Unlike the PLO, Hamas has never been signatory to the Geneva Conventions. Hamas explicitly repudiates the notion of a civilian/military distinction, both for Israelis and for Palestinians.
It's correct to describe Hamas as the ruling government in Gaza. The error is when people describe it as the elected government. Hamas was elected once; then they cancelled any further elections so they could stay in power after fucking over everyone else who lives there.
Last I checked, the original allegation was not that news media organizations were aware of the October 7 massacre in advance, but that some independent Gaza photographers were aware of the massacre in advance, and sold photos to those news media. And the media organizations in question have already stopped working with those photographers.
Of course, the American Fascist Party have been telling Lügenpresse stories for years now.
Meanwhile, Netanyahu was quite likely aware of the attack in advance, and chose to allow it to proceed. There were warnings from Egypt, the USA, and other Israeli allies from their intelligence services. So really we should be talking about Netanyahu regime complicity, not media complicity.
I'm not at the moment, but if I were dating, it would be within a poly-friendly social context. I'm not in this space by accident; it's actually what makes sense to me.
B is also dating J, who lives in a big complicated house with lots of people, including their partner K.
Separately, C is dating X.
X is married to Y; X is also dating Z.
I don't know Y or K well enough to know if they have other partners, but I suspect so.
No, I am not dating anyone on this list.
As far as I'm aware, there's no current polycule link between AB and C; nor between any of them and me.
Everyone in this list is in their 30s or 40s, and almost all are some flavor of queer; at least two are also trans. There are no kids in the picture, although we know other poly people in the neighborhood who do have kids.
It's all quite cheerful and civilized. Compersion is totally a thing. Also, fortunately people's food preferences aren't complicated when everyone's over for dinner. If anybody starts dating someone who doesn't like mushrooms, that's gonna be a problem.
Well, if you keep pushing the button eventually you will be smart enough to figure out something even better to do with your time. Then push it once more to check. Then if the idea still seems like a good plan, go do it.
To be clear, the news organizations haven't rejected the claim that the freelance photographers they worked with were complicit in the attacks. They've just rejected the claim that they (the news organizations) were complicit, and have cut ties with the photographers who are alleged to be complicit.
Some of the freelance photographers appear to have accompanied Hamas members on attacks on civilians, in a way that implies that they knew the attack was going to happen and were able to prepare to cover it.
Oh, so can I keep trying until I get to be fubo69? Nice.
(I am a heavy Signal user; it's my primary messaging service for people I know IRL. It's where I post cute pictures of my housemates' cats. I really want the Signal folks to get stuff right and not mess it up.)
So if I claim fubo as a username on Signal, that means what? Nobody else can use that username? If so, it's another global namespace, same as Twitter; ten or twenty years in the future, someone's gonna want to be reclaiming disused usernames.
(What if I want to be fubo to some people, and MissCatPictures to other people? Can I do that from one phone? One phone number?)
That Disney company is kind of a big deal too.